Share this

William Anderson (guest)
NY:

As a professional investment adviser, I’ve never seen a benefit to allowing business run a health care program. The premiums bankrupt individuals, ruin businesses, and that a corporate bureaucrat sits between you and your health care provider is the most egregious part of the whole program.

Brad Bonar (guest)
PA:

One can only wonder whether the esteemed Arena contributors would be as faux-outraged regarding Rep. King's possible hearings if it were, say, tea party members who were behind the Ft. Hood massacre, Christmas Day underwear bomber, Time Square bomber, Fort Dix 6, Lackawanna 6, the shoe bomber, etc., etc., etc.

August Murphy-King (guest)
NY:

Rep. Gosar suggests that he knows no government run health care programs that work: Canada ... who's in better economic shape than the U.S.

Al Zeller (guest)
NY:

Step 1: Repeal. Step 2: Issa holds hearings to prove the numbers don't add up (this is where the Dems start taking a beating) and show the real costs and tricks used. Step 3: Vote to repeal the mandate. Step 4. Vote on blocking money from Medicare to be used for Obamacare. See a pattern here? With each step the GOP will make it harder and harder for moderate Dems to stand behind the law. Can you see why the Dems are in a panic?

Laura Halvorsen (guest)
FL:

I love it when Arena experts talk about what regular people like myself want. Here's what we want: we want health insurance that's affordable (and let's define "affordable"). But for that to happen, health care costs have to come down. And that's not going to happen without tort reform - something conspicuously missing from the health care reform bill (meaning that it reforms nothing).

andrew kimmel (guest)
PA:

1. Nearly two-thirds of U.S. doctors surveyed fear health care reform could worsen care for patients" - according to a Thomson Reuters survey released Tuesday.

Michael Foster (guest)
FL:

The choice of contributors to the Arena page is poor. Can Beltway people add some insight? Sure. But the contributions should really be heard from regular people who are not a part of the active political scene. I already know what a Democratic or Republican strategist is going to say. I also know the general leanings of a university professors. What about the mom at home with her kids? Or the military service member?

Michael Fisher (guest)
WA:

Obamacare has already had a major impact on insurance coverage in the state of Washington, and it isn't good. The response in this state to the mandates for child coverage, extending the age for young adult coverage, lifting ceilings, etc. has been to eliminate policies for the individual insured category. As of Jan. 1, companies including Blue Cross Blue Shield have stopped offering child coverage. Repeal this atrocity!

Chris Sells (guest)
AL:

After health care passed almost a year later, I still do not understand how the benefits of a 2,000-page law can fit on a few pages. Health care is such a complex and tangled issue. There is no replacing or reforming in a meaningful way as portrayed by either side. This law reminds me of a drug ad -- advertisers list a few benefits at the beginning then at the end of the ad list numerous side effects ... nausea being one of them.

Thomas Hall (guest)
MD:

Recall that health care costs and our national debt doubled under Bush as the profit-driven system posted record profits for insurers, providers, wealthy doctors, drug companies and medical suppliers. Bankruptcy laws were changed by GOP to benefit not consumers but banks, lenders, etc. (many later bailed out). Most bankruptcies were due to overwhelming medical bills not irresponsible spending. The health care bill benefitts working-class America.

bill janes (guest)
WA:

Question for the debate: In a time when "the cost of health care is driving deficits," why is the federal government, through this "reform," intent on subsidizing a non-value-added private sector - i.e. insurance industry - for shuffling papers, an activity government workers can do at 4 percent overhead instead of the 20 percent overhead provided to the private sector with taxpayer money?

Steve McKinney (guest)
CO:

The goals of both Democrats and Republicans are still wrong. The goal for health care should be that money plays no part in the care an individual receives. This works wonderfully well in all other post-industrial states and, except for Republican obstructionism, could have worked just as well in the United States.

john betancourt (guest)
PA:

The real question is, what is the goal here? Clearly, it is not to repeal the health care bill. Republicans are essentially trying to extend the climate/energy that swept them all into office by providing their base with something else to get excited/steamed about. These are angry voters and they are concerned about the direction of the country. At some point they, i.e. the Republicans, have to cease being in opposition, and have to start governing.

charles graham (guest)
AL:

Kevin,
It is true that Republicans had an alternative but it was scored as costing more and only insuring 1-2 million more people out of the 40 million without health care. President Obama instructed both sides to write a bill that would lower government costs in the long term and insure those that were presently not insured. When the bills were turned in one did most of what was required and the other missed the mark completely.

Jason Yarborough (guest)
SC:

They have to repeal the bill before we can find out what they'll replace it with ...

Davd LeFevre (guest)
FL:

A law that was written and passed by one side of America needs to be abolished and so a law or set of laws that all Americans approve of can be passed. The Republicans will not take a hit as pronounced by many on here; instead they will be applauded. We are not a socialist country. There are the haves and the have nots. Why should health care be any different? We just need to find a way to do the same without "insurance" being the answer.

Jim Wojtasiewicz (guest)
VA:

I challenge any Republican to explain honestly (without referring to opinion polls) what is wrong with the health care bill. There is no government takeover of health care. It doesn't insert government bureaucrats between doctor and patient. It doesn't kill jobs and it saves money. True, health insurance becomes mandatory, but so is car insurance. There is still free choice among private insurance companies. Why is this bad?

More POLITICO Arena

About the Arena

The Arena is a cross-party, cross-discipline forum for intelligent and lively conversation about political and policy issues. Contributors have been selected by POLITICO staff and editors. David Mark, Arena's moderator, is a Senior Editor at POLITICO. Each morning, POLITICO sends a question based on that day's news to all contributors.